Students Post Dismal Results On History Test

For U.S. students, a song from America's past may best describe
their knowledge of it: "Don't know much about history."

The Department of Education released results here last week from
last year's nationwide test of what 4th, 8th, and 12th graders know
about U.S. history. The findings were so discouraging that the allusion
to the 1965 Sam Cooke tune "Wonderful World" was one even Secretary of
Education Richard W. Riley could not help making.

"It's clear, as the song says, students don't know much about
history," Mr. Riley said in a statement accompanying the results.

The most gloomy finding that the National Assessment of Educational
Progress uncovered was about 12th graders' grasp of history: 57 percent
were not able to reach even the "basic" level of achievement, which
shows only a partial mastery of the subject.

Just 11 percent of the 12th graders reached the "proficient" level
on the test, which meant that they had a solid grasp of people, places,
events, ideas, and documents in historical context and had some
awareness of factors that shape historical settings. Most students take
at least one U.S. history course in high school by the end of the 11th
grade.

Contrary to the expectation that students' knowledge expands with
exposure to the subject, younger students fared somewhat better than
the 12th graders. More than six in 10 students in the 4th and 8th
grades reached at least the basic level. And 17 percent of the 4th
graders and 14 percent of the 8th graders attained the proficient
level.

Across all the three grades, just 1 percent to 2 percent reached the
advanced level. The remainder of students scored below the basic level:
36 percent of the 4th graders and 39 percent of the 8th
graders.

Troubling Findings

"The results are deeply disturbing. I was shocked, really," said
Maris A. Vinovskis, a professor of history at the University of
Michigan who spoke at the Education Department news conference held to
release the results.

As is the case on other NAEP tests, students at all grades did
better if their parents had more education and if they were enrolled in
private schools. Across all grades, white and Asian-American students
had significantly higher scores than did black and Hispanic students,
and students in the Northeast and Central regions did better than those
in the Southeast.

Boys in 12th grade scored better on average than senior girls, but
there was no such difference among the 4th and 8th graders.

The fact that only 19 percent of black seniors scored at or above
the basic level was especially troubling, Mr. Vinovskis said. "We are
facing a real crisis," he said.

The Princeton, N.J.-based Educational Testing Service administers
the NAEP tests, also known as "the nation's report card," for the
department's National Center for Education Statistics. Since 1969, the
congressionally mandated assessment has been the only ongoing national
survey of what students know about a variety of academic subjects. Last
year, about 22,500 students took the history test.

Even though a national assessment was given in U.S. history in 1988,
officials said the results are not comparable to those from the 1994
test. The exam was redone, complete with new test questions and new
guiding principles, for 1994. But in 1988, officials also found that
most seniors had only a limited knowledge of history.

Rigor and Camp David

On the new test, a majority of 4th graders knew that Susan B.
Anthony helped women win the right to vote. But only 5 percent could
imagine that they lived on the Western frontier and could give two
reasons why Eastern friends should or should not come West.

Meanwhile, 69 percent of 8th graders and 65 percent of 12th graders
knew that disease brought by the Europeans was the major cause of death
among Indians in the Americas in the 1500s and 1600s. But only 14
percent of 8th graders and 27 percent of 12th graders knew that the
Camp David accords negotiated by President Carter promoted peace
between Egypt and Israel.

For the first time in a NAEP examination, the 12th graders' average
score on the test--286 on a 500-point scale--fell below the cutoff
designating a basic level of knowledge about the subject. The score
would have to have been 294 in order to reach the basic level.

But, Mr. Riley and others pointed out, the new test is a tough one.
In his statement, Mr. Riley said the history NAEP is "much more
rigorous than what most students are used to seeing in school,
requiring greater historical knowledge, more writing, and application
of analytical skills."

About 60 percent of testing time was devoted to questions requiring
students to write out answers; the rest were multiple choice.

The test reflects both the sense of the past and the ability to
reason that students must have to make informed decisions in a
democracy, said Sharon P. Robinson, the Education Department's
assistant secretary for educational research and improvement.

In order to reach the basic level on the history test, 12th graders,
for example, had to accumulate 42 percent of the possible points. For a
proficient designation, they had to amass 63 percent, and for the
advanced level, 82 percent.

Those point percentages were comparable to those needed for seniors
to reach the same achievement levels on last year's NAEP test in
geography. But on that test, whose results were released last month,
greater percentages of students were able to reach those levels; in
some cases, the proportions were twice as large. (See Education Week,
Oct. 25, 1995.)

Pointing to Standards

The National Assessment Governing Board sets the achievement levels
for NAEP after an elaborate standards-setting process. Teachers,
historians, curriculum specialists, administrators, and others
nationwide participate in that process and forward recommendations to
the board.

Before releasing the history results, the board debated whether to
go along with the recommended achievement standards. William T.
Randall, the board president and the education commissioner of
Colorado, said in a written statement that the board decided to adopt
the achievement levels in part because the results of the 1994
assessment seemed consistent with those from the 1988 test. Had the
same standards been applied then, he said, "the results would have been
similarly dismal."

The Education Department report detailing the results offers several
explanations for why the students did so poorly. It cited differences
in what is taught as U.S. history and students' possible unfamiliarity
with the types of questions that appear on the test.

Mr. Vinovskis and Christopher T. Cross, the president of the
Washington-based Council for Basic Education, said the test results
point to the need for wide adoption of the beleaguered voluntary
national content standards in history, which outline what students
should know and be able to do in the subject.

A report with more analysis of the results is expected in
January.

In related news, the Education Department has issued a revised
version of its 1994 NAEP reading report that contains corrections for
errors that occurred because of two technical glitches. (See Education
Week, Sept. 27 and Oct. 4, 1995.)

Web Only

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.